Dear Sir/Madam
The Guardians of Pauatahanui Inlet is an incorporated society, with about 200 financial members.
The Guardians were set up in 1991 to promote the recognition of the ecological, historic, recreational and cultural values of the Pauatahanui Inlet. Guardians have conducted regular cockle surveys, made submissions on behalf of the Inlet in planning processes, have produced an education kit for use in schools, run a number of educational and promotional activities and have instigated a stream monitoring programme in the Inlet catchment. Guardians were also instrumental in initiating, promoting and supporting the development of the Pauatahanui Inlet Action Plan. This plan is endorsed by the Guardians.
Pauatahanui Inlet is identified in the Regional Coastal plan as a significant coastal environment and is registered as a site of National Significance in the SSWI database (Sites of Special Wildlife Interest).
Comment on the draft Plan
General
Before commenting on the draft Plan, Guardians wish to record our gratitude for the Council’s support, in money and services, over the past years for the implementation of the Pauatahanui Inlet Action Plan (PIAP). The research undertaken by and for the Council has led to a much better understanding of the state of health of the Inlet and given good grounds for the planning of the preventative and remedial action necessary, in the Inlet itself and in its catchment, to preserve and enhance that health.
We also applaud the Council for its commitment in this draft Plan to continuing to stress as “key issues” the concept of taking an “ecosystems approach” to biodiversity and to applying significant targets for soil erosion protection.
Implementation of the Pauatahanui Inlet Action Plan
Guardians are most pleased to read in the draft Plan the Council’s continuing commitment to implementation of PIAP, but we have problems assessing what this commitment entails and thus in commenting sensibly on the draft.
As a community-based organisation concerned solely for the wellbeing of the Inlet and all of its ecological, recreational and cultural values, we are extremely disappointed to find that it is very difficult to address the issues that concern us in this draft LTCCP as they are buried within larger topics that contain no details of the work planned to be done in the Inlet and its catchment or of the finance to be devoted to it.
For example, the layout of the “Environment” section of the draft Plan gives us no opportunity to comment on either the actions Council is planning or the finance devoted to them in its commitment to implementing PIAP . Nor can we compare how the Council’s intentions and priorities about the Inlet stand with respect to other similar activities. Even the reason for the large increases in finance for this section (from $590,000 in 07-08 to $770,000 in 08-09) is unexplained, or at least is not obvious.
Similarly, in the “Land” section there is a most welcome annual commitment to complete “approved programmes … under six catchment control schemes” and to undertake “five kilometres of riparian management, focusing on increased biodiversity” but without information on the location of these activities the nature of the “approved programmes” we do not know whether they affect the Inlet catchment and thus whether we wish to comment on them.
Transport
PIAP recognises the detrimental effect of transport-related pollutants on water and sediment quality of the Inlet. This effect obviously is positively correlated with the traffic flow around the Inlet (mainly SH 58 and Grays Road).
Implementation of PIAP thus calls for means of reducing this flow or mitigating its effect on the Inlet. Guardians thus are pleased to see the commitment in the draft Plan to means of reducing traffic flow in the region in general. But we are surprised that no specific recognition or priority is given to the need to reduce traffic flows adjacent to ecologically sensitive areas – of which Pauatahanui Inlet is a prime example in the region. We suggest that Council could stress this issue more clearly in the section on Transport Key issues and integrate this with comments in the “Environment” section on the need to prevent environmental degradation being also a key issue.
Conclusions
Guardians welcome most strongly the continuing support proposed by Council in the draft LTCCP for implementation of PIAP, but regret that more detailed comment is inhibited by the lack of information provided. We believe that we cannot be alone in this frustration as it simply is not possible from this Plan alone to determine whether some issues are relevant to any particular community group.
We appreciate that the Council may require some flexibility in its statements and allocations in order to deal with unanticipated future events and conditions but we strongly urge the need for greater transparency than is revealed in this Plan.
We also appreciate that providing this detail would make the draft overly long and all we really seek is a notice in the Plan as to how community groups and ratepayers may access the information they need. We suggest that your website is the proper place for this.
Guardians would welcome an opportunity to speak to this submission.
Yours sincerely
John Wells
Chairperson
234 1788
wellsjm@xtra.co.nz
